Friday, 11 April 2014

Speed

BLUF: To demonstrate that Smithman had many opportunities to avoid the
Smiths even taking into account the motion of all participants, so
confirming that contact was intentional on his part.

1. PREFACE

We
are accused of writing in riddles. We are aware we do write long and
detailed posts and we have explained why we do that. We are also aware
that our posts are objective.

To make that clear we have decided
to use something that Wikipedia says is commonly used in US military
writing: BLUF – Bottom Line Up Front.

A quick and objective summary of what the post is about.

2. INTRODUCTION

We
have dealt extensively in the past with the Smith Sighting. About
its reasons (to have an “abductor” seen that night on PdL’s streets),
about its participants (Gerry carrying Tanner’s blonde daughter),
about its myths (debunking the ideas that the body was disposed of at the beach or
church), about why it went wrong (Smiths taking way too long to come
forward) and about what we consider evident:Smithman’s clear intent in
making contact with the Smiths.

We have shown why this intent is very clear in two
ways.

One was to debunk the idea the child being carried was dead, so
showing that no body was carried that night in Rua da Escola Primária. The child being alive meant the girl seen carried was to look like Maddie being abducted.

The other was to show how the geographical reality of where it all
happenedprovesthere were many opportunities for Smithman to escape contact and
the fact that he didn’t can only mean he wanted to be seen.

These were the posts where we showed you why the Smith Sighting was intentional due to the geographical reality and the fact the carried girl was very much alive:

Even
so, it seems that there remains doubt about the Smithman’s intent of
being seen. We apparently have yet to take into account that both Smithman
and Smiths were moving towards each other and so he could have surprised
them and he be surprised by them.

We received a comment precisely to that effect:

"Sorry Textusa,

Must disagree with you about the Smith Sighting. It wasn’t intentional. The Smith girl clearly states that she sees the man only after she comes up from the stairs and looks to her left. She’s surprised by him. Peter Smith says he saw the man IMMEDIATELY at the beginning of the Rua Escola Primária. So they crossed at the corner of this street with Rua 25 de Abril. They all walked into each other. The Smiths were walking up the stairs when the man was walking down Rua Escola Primária. It was an all-round surprise encounter! And where is it written in the PJ Files that Smithman stopped long enough and with near enough proximity to be asked by a total stranger if the dead body of the child he was holding was asleep?!?Please feel free not to publish this."

Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 29 November 201315:49:00 "

We
received this comment and decided not to publish it as it seemed to raise doubts about the intention of the Smith Sighting which we wanted to clarify in a post.

It says that we may have been wrong
about what we said in our Intentional - Not Debatable Fact post about the clear, and not debatable Smithman's intention to be seen by the Smiths in that event known as the Smith Sighting.

We have said time and time again, and will now repeat, that we like to be corrected. Openly. Transparently.

For
logic’s sake. If things are there that need be corrected, then we must do just
that. We don’t mind being shown to be wrong, on the contrary, we welcome it.
To proceed uncorrected is to base following arguments on false
premises.

To correct us is to be our friend. That simple, that true.

We certainly don't want to be accused of intellectual dishonesty.

We don't put other people's work on caution without justification and promising to come back to the subject but never doing so. Whenever we have disagreed with someone we have always justified our disagreement.

We have always answered our readers' questions and have always corrected our statements when we found ourselves wrong.

We have never pretended to look the other way when something went against our line of thought. On the contrary, we have always confronted contradiction. Just like we're doing today.

There is currently an exception to this, and it's about the CMTV documentary. We have still to provide our opinion on it. But as we have said, we will do so as soon as a sentence of the trial is reached.

The Smith Sighting is of capital importance in the Maddie Affair. There can be no doubt about it. The granularity of its analysis is never too great.

The correction above was basically to tell us that we didn’t take into account that all
those involved in the Smith Sighting were moving. The Smiths didn’t
simply stay put where the crossings happened and wait for Smithman to
pass by them.

Mathematically, it's the inverse situation of the very well known problem
of determining the crossing point of two different trains leaving
from their respective stations and coming towards each other at different
speeds.

If they came at the same speed they would meet exactly at half way.

In the Smith Sighting we have, as we have shown but will show again, the exact location for
each crossing, so what is to be determined is, at a certain point
in time, the distance each “train” is from the respective crossing point.

The “trains” in question being Smithman coming from one direction and Peter Smith, Martin Smith and AS coming towards him.

3. THE SMITH CROSSING LOCATIONS

The opening comment of the post reveals that there
seems to be confusion about where the crossings with the Smiths
and Smithman happened.

If at the Rua da Escola Primária or at the corner between this street and Rua 25 de Abril.

This confusion has been generated by the use of the
expression “IMMEDIATELY at the beginning of Rua Escola
Primária” by both Peter and Martin in their
statements about where the crossings happened.

According to some translations, both Peter and Martin apparently say IMMEDIATELY at the beginning of Rua Escola
Primária.

However, what is written in the PJ Files is “logo no início”
which translates into “right at the beginning”.

Take into account
that the statement is taken from English, translated at that moment into
Portuguese and then back again into English.

Speculating, what may
have been “at the beginning” became “logo no início” which in turn, wrongly,
became “immediately at the beginning”.

Without speculation is
that we have both Peter and Martin SmithSAYING they crossed with
Smithman “right at the beginning of Rua Escola Primária”.

What is the difference?

It
isn’t exactly mere wordplay. “Right at the beginning” is somewhat more
vague in terms of precision than “immediately at the beginning”.

The
latter, much more so than the first, would seem to indicate that both Martin or Peter were NOT yet in Rua da Escola Primária but
still coming up the stairs or crossing Rua 25 de Abril when Smithman
was approaching both.

If that was so, then it would mean that Smithman
would only have realised the Smiths' presence when it was too late to
react, thus justifying the encounter as accidental and in no way
intentional as we have here stated, beyond any sort of doubt, that it
was.

But that just can't be. It's simply not possible for Martin and Peter to both NOT yetbe in Rua da Escola Primária when Smithman approached.
Why? Because both Martin and Peter SAY it can’t be.

Let’s, for just a minute, suppose
that the “IMMEDIATELY” is the result of correct translation, although we know it’s
not. That would mean that both Peter and Martin would have to be in
exact same spot, or very, very near each other.

The statements tell us the family had separated into groups. From the statements alone we don’t know into how many (as we'll see later, it can be inferred from images that it was into 3).

If Martin and Peter
were part of the same group then the description of what they saw would
have been identical or very similar.

They aren’t, as we’ll see.

Peter
Smith“refers that when he crossed with the individual, the man was
coming down on his[Peter’s] right, the deponent circulating in the
middle of the street”

Martin Smith“refers that when he crossed with the individual, the man was coming down in the middle of the road, on the street”

Note that Peter is very clear that he's in the“middle of the street”. He's not at a crossing. Martin says he sees Smithman when the man is in the “middle of the road”.

We assume that the street/road referred is Rua da Escola Primária as any speculation that it is any other route simply doesn't make sense for someone coming from Apartment 5A.

So
we have Smithman crossing Peter, standing in the middle of the
road, on Peter’s right, and appearing on the middle of the road to
Martin when Martin first becomes aware of him.

As we’ll see later, Smithman crosses with Martin on Martin’s left.

So
the sequence is this: Smithman crosses with Peter on Peter’s right, crosses the
street so that when Martin becomes aware of him he’s in the middle of the
road and then crosses Martin on Martin’s left.

For this to happen you need one thing: space.

Space between Martin and Peter.

They can’t BOTH be at the intersection between Rua da
Escola Primária and Rua 25 de Abril. even though they BOTH say “right at the beginning”.

To one of them, the one who is
walking in front of the group, Peter, the words “right at the beginning” mean
that he is indeed at the beginning Rua da Escola Primária but inside
it.

To
doubt in any way this EXACT location is to doubt Peter’scapability to
point a finger or the PJ’s capability to represent where, EXACTLY,
he has pointed his finger:

The letter P indicates exactly where Smithman crossed with Peter Smith. It's well inside Rua Escola Primária. It's at its beginning, but well inside it.

To take as more accurately the words
“immediately at the beginning” (a mistranslation of “right at the
beginning”) over a finger pointed location is just to make up fact to fit the story.

The images, much more than the words, the images are ABSOLUTELY clear as to where EXACTLY the THREE sightings happened:

This in turn allows us to determine the distances between the 3 crossing points:

We know that the approximate distances between the CPs are the following:

- CP1 – CP2 = 17 metres (Peter and Martin)

- CP2 – CP3 = 11 metres (Martin and AS)

- CP1 – CP3 = 28 metres (Peter and AS)

Considering that where Smithman crosses with Martin Smith is where Rua
da Escola Primária starts, then Peter Smith is approximately 17 metres
into it when he’s crossed.

4. THE SPEED FACTOR

In the problem of the trains
leaving the station one is given the distance between the stations and
the speed of both trains. With these 3 values (distance, speed train1 and speed train2) one is able to calculate
the meeting or crossing point.

As we said, in the Smith sighting,
we have only the location of crossing points. What one wishes to calculate is, at a
certain point in time, the distance between the 2 “trains”, Smithman and
a Smith. The values that one requires, and doesn’t have, are the
speeds of each of these 2 elements.

That is overcome by using the
value of Smithman’s speed, whatever it may have been, and reference the
Smith’s walking speed to it.

We’ll use 3 relative speeds: Smithman
(SM) and Smith (S) walking at a same speed towards each other, S walking at half of SM’s speed and S walking at a quarter of
SM’s speed.

To have S walk faster than SM is simply not realistic.

It can easily be understood that when SM is at 100 metres from the crossing point (CP), then:

- S will be, if walking at same SM’s speed, at 100 metres from CP, so200 metres from SM;

- S will be, if walking at a halfof SM’s speed, at 50 metres from CP, so 150 metres from SM;

- S will be, if walking at a quarterof SM’s speed, at 25 metres from CP, so 125 metres from SM.

5. THE SMITH FAMILY “CONVOY”

We don’t have one crossing point (CP) but 3 CPs.
CP1, where Smithman crossed with Peter, CP2 where he crossed with Martin and
CP3 where he crossed with AS.

We have seen that there’s 17 metres between CP1 (Peter) and CP2 (Martin).

This means that when SM is crossing with Peter in CP1:

- If Martin was walking at same speed as SM, then Martin would be 17 metres from CP2, so34 metres from SM;

- If Martin was walking at a half of SM’s speed, then Martin would be 8.5 metres from CP2, so 25.5 metres from SM;

- If Martin was walking at a quarter of SM’s speed, then Martin would be 4.25 metres from CP2, so 21.25 metres from SM;

Peter, who is standing exactly where SM is standing, would be at the referred distances from Martin.

So the distance between Peter and Martin would
be 34, 25.5 or 21.25 metres (distances shown above) depending on whether they’re walking,
respectively, at the same, half or a quarter speed of what SM was.

The distance between them would be maintained as we’re assuming that both Peter and Martin are walking at the same speed:

Peter and Martin would be relative to each other, at same speed:

at half speed:

at a quarter speed:

The
exact same reasoning can be made between CP1 (Peter) and CP3 (AS). The distance between both is 28 metres, so when AS, at the third and last CP, is crossed by SM:

- If walking the samespeed as SM, Peter is 56 metres ahead of AS.

- If walking at halfof SM’s speed, Peter is 42 metres ahead of AS.

- If walking at a quarterspeed, Peter is 35 metres ahead of AS.

These distances tell you, EXACTLY, the distance in which the whole Smith family
was spread out depending on the speed they were walking relative to Smithman's.

If at same speed:

If at half speed:

If at quarter speed:

The faster they walked relative to SM’s walking speed the further apart they were. The slower, the nearer.

This distance will always be bigger than the distance
between CP1(P) and CP3(A), as for it to be the same they would have to be
standing still!

6. THE ENCOUNTERS

Now, we just have to put all in motion:

If at same speed:

If at half speed:

If at quarter speed:

7. EYE CONTACT

The opening comment suggests that AS was probably surprised by Smithman as she came up the stairs. We tend to agree.

Peter speaks of Smithman only when this man is on his right, and Martin first speaks of him when he's in the middle of the road after crossing Peter.

It's quite irrelevant whether any or all Smiths were surprised by Smithman. What is important is whether Smithman was surprised by the Smiths.

In a surprise party it's evident the person being paid the homage will be surprisedbut it's also an undeniable fact that all those who planned it and those who accepted to participate in it, aren't.

That night the Smiths' only agenda is to get home. At the other end of Rua da Escola Primária.

But Smithman has a specific and criminal agenda.

Whatever reason made the Smith Sighting happen, Smithman is intentionally obstructing justice in an event involving the death of a 4 yr old girl.

For those us who are absolutely sure that the encounter was intentional, the event was concocted so that an abductor would materialise, a character absolutely essential for the abduction thesis.

For those who stubbornly still say the Smith Sighting was accidental, they say it was to take Maddie's body somewhere.

The distances between them all are huge and it's difficult to visualise how a group of people would communicate with each other. Did they speak loudly or shout to each other?

The children would be chatting and possibly noisy so Smithman could have heard the group before he saw them and so could have avoided them, possibly without being seen.

A group of 9 in good spirits after a night out wouldn’t be silent and adults would be giving instructions to the children to get them safely over the roads, probably holding their hands.

The ONLY hypothesis for the encounter to have been accidental is for Smithman, Gerry McCann, to be carrying Maddie's corpse in his arms.

So it's quite irrelevant when Smithman sees AS or Martin Smith. What REALLY matters is when does he see Peter Smith, the front-runner of the “Smith Family Convoy”.

And, if when Smithman sees him, if he's able to react, if he has time to react, if he has the possibility to react.

That is what determines whether the encounter was accidental or not, because if he had time and the possibility to escape contact then ifit happened, as it did, then it can only be because he didn't want to avoid it.

Not because he couldn't but because he wouldn't.

We will represent where Smithman is, at the various relative speeds, when Peter Smith is at CP3, at the top of the stairs, perfectly visible from Rua da Escola Primária.

If at same speed:

If at half speed:

If at quarter speed:

As can be seen Smithman has 10, 40 or 100 metres to escape contact if the Smiths are walking at the same, half or a quarter speed as he is.

The shortest of the 3 distances is when Smiths are walking at the same speed SM is: 10 metres. 11 yds. 12 to 13 steps. 33 ft.

To see if it's enough, we'll ask you to do an exercise.

One that we all, shamefully, have done at one time or another: who hasn't been surprised by someone, in the street, in a shopping mall or wherever, who we don't want to see? Who we immediately tried to avoid?

In that situation didn't we immediately desperately look for somewhere we could go? We just dashed into the first opportune place we could.

We certainly didn't need 12 to 13 steps to react. So why would a man criminally holding the body of a dead child be unable to react in such a distance?

Panic?

Panic makes one do stupid things indeed. For example, in desperate situations it makes one trample over others. But one does this for a reason: safety. One acts irrationally to seek where one thinks safety is, sometimes with disastrous results.

If he was in panic, Smithman would have either quickly backtracked his steps or would run towards the stairs on his left. He does neither.

What is certain is that even in panic he most certainly wouldn't “run” towards the Smiths because that's exactly where the threat is.

He walks normally towards the Smiths. Call it what you may just don't call it panic.

10 metres, 11 yds, 33 ft. BUT ONLY, as said, in the case the Smiths are walking at the same speed he was. Any slower this distance, as can be seen, is greater.

40 metres, 44 yds, 131 ft, to the stairs on the left if they're walking at half of his speed. With other options: Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on the left and an unnamed street on the right.

100 metres, 109 yds, 328 ft, to the stairs on the left if the Smiths are walking at a quarter. With other options: alley on the right, Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on the left and an unnamed street on the right.

8. WHAT SPEED?

We obviously don't know, for certain, at what speed either Smithman or the Smiths were walking.

However we can make an educated guess. We know the Smith family “convoy” was made up of 9 people:

From the EXACT locations of the sightings, and by the people who reported
them, we can deduce that the party was broken up into three groups:

- 2 Adults - Peter Smith (23) and wife (age unknown), in the front,
setting up the pace, as she was feeling ill.

- 2 Adults and 2 Children - Martin Smith (58), wife (age unknown), two
grandchildren (6 and 4), following the front party, grandparents taking
care of their grandchildren, walking as fast as a 4 yr old
would allow.

- 3 Youngsters, (13, 12 and 10) probably staying back and playing games
with each other on their last night together in the Algarve.

The 9 people could have been separated differently. All we have for certain is that Peter and his wife are part of the first group, Martin Smith and wife part of the second and AS part of the third.

Irrelevant of where they are located we know the group contains an adult feeling ill and a 4 yr old. And we know the whole group is walking uphill.

So we have to compare the speed between an adult male, carrying a burden (14.5kg - 18kg / 32lb - 40lb) and walking downhill with a womanfeeling ill and a 4 yr old, both walking uphill.

We also know that if the speed was the same, the Smith familycovered in an area of 56 metres. That's just over 2 tennis courts. It's not a reasonable distance for 3 groups to have separated into after having left a bar and just gone up stairs with a woman in the front feeling ill .

We think that when we say the Smiths could be walking at a quarter of the Smithman's speed, we are exaggerating. We think the Smiths were walking slower than that.

But, as always, you be the decider. We think we have given you all the information you need to decide.

9. CONCLUSION

Smithman surprised the Smiths as they were probably too absorbed in their thoughts, problems and interactions to pay attention to a man coming down Rua da Escola Primária.

Smithman was not surprised by the Smiths. He saw Peter Smith at a distance that would not render him actionless and much less optionless He had time (represented by distance) and many option (alley on the right, Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on the left, an unnamed street on the right and stairs on the left) to avoid contact.

Smithman encountered the Smiths because he decided not to avoid the contact.

10. “EPILOGUE”
About where do the PJ Files say that Smithman stopped.

The answer to that question is: nowhere.

But we never said it did. We were very clear that it was Sky News that reported it.

“Martin Smith, from Drogheda in Co
Louth, was on holiday in Praia Da Luz with his family when they bumped
into the man just before 10pm on May 3 last year. The Smith family's
suspicions were aroused because the man made no responsewhen they asked
if the barefoot child was asleep. "He just put his head down and
averted his eyes, which is very unusual in a tourist town at such a
quiet time of the year," said Mr Smith.”

It seems to us that the phrase “...when they asked
if the barefoot child was asleep” means clearly that either Martin Smith or his wife asked Smithman a question.

Sky News is supposedly not tabloid. This hasn't been denied or corrected.

We don't know the exact wording of the question but it's an educated guess that it was either “Asleep?” or “Is she asleep?”

IF the Sky News report is true, then Smithman did stop long enough and with close enough proximity to be asked by a total stranger (Martin Smith or his wife) if the dead body (which we know wasn't the case but just stating if, after all this, you still “insist” on believing the encounter to be accidental) of the child he was holding was asleep.

We did not take into account this eventual short-stop when calculating the distances linked to Smithman v Smiths relative speeds.

Post Scriptum: The blog will now be breaking for Easter. We wish all our readers a very happy one.

136 comments:

Smithman's night stroll through the streets of Luz HAD TO BE INTENTIONAL ! Why walk with a child in his arms, late in the evening, in the direction of where are many pubs and restaurants, if not to be spotted by passers by (and hopefully later remembered by those people)? It just happened to be the Smiths, but it could have been anyone, other tourists or even portuguese people (locals). All that mattered was to be seen, a man carrying a motionless blonde 3 to 4 year old girl, a girl that would be all over the news in the next couple of hours, vanished, supposedly abducted by a stranger!What better validation of abduction by a stranger than eyewitnesses coming forward the next day saying they had seen a man carrying a girl that fitted Madeleine's description, going towards the beach?! (boat waiting, escaping to Morocco, etc.)

Or maybe just tell the Smiths “Nice specimen of a girl I just abducted myself, eh? There are more like this one, in the Ocean Club if you’re interested… Hey, just in the room I found this one there were other two!!! Can you believe it?”

The fact the Smiths only came later had more to with the fact they were paying attention to themselves and not to strangers, like Peter Smith says, “he did not notice those details as his pregnant wife was somewhat ill and he was constantly attending to her, not caring about observation of the individual”.

But the timespan you refer, is very strange indeed. In times everyone who saw a blonde little girl on the street headed straight to the nearest police station (or so the tabloids report, mind you) it took some weeks, like you say, for the Smiths to come forward.

Please read the following posts:http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/01/textusas-phone-hacking-scandal-1.htmlhttp://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/02/textusas-phone-hacking-scandal-2.htmlhttp://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/02/textusas-phone-hacking-scandal-3.htmlhttp://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/02/textusas-phone-hacking-scandal-4.html

Add to this that Gerry made an appeal for Irish tourist to come forward:http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/09/luck-of-irish.html

About “Well, he could have just been a man walking home”, what an egotistical man carrying his daughter through the streets barefooted and only with flimsy light pyjamas on a chilly night. So chilly that even Tanner had to borrow a fleece.

We recommend you read:http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/06/self-evident-fact-sedation.html

Any more comments with insults like ridiculous won't be published. You have your own blog to do that.

Well, it was bad luck that Smithman just happened to bump into a family of absent minded people, that take a long time to put 2+2 together...and also "bad luck" Smithman did not bump into any other holiday makers...were the Smiths the only people out at that time?! No one else, not one single soul has crossed paths with Smithman, no one else came forward saying they've seen a man with a child. Why? I bet that after passing by the Smiths, Smithman quickly vanished from the streets, returned "home", this time taking care not to be spotted by anyone else, his "task" fulfilled with success, or so he thought. How lucky, bumping into such a large group of people, so many witnesses, "it's in the bag"!

I don't think Gerry McCann stopped at all. He may have slowed slightly but it appears as if it was one of those instances when someone says something to a passer by such as, 'Ooh, isn't it cold today?' To which the person would usually respond while still on the move. 'Yes, not half.' Or, 'Yeah, bloody freezing.'It certainly does appear as if he wanted to be seen, I definitely agree.

On a different point. With all the recent bullcrap being spewed out by Officer Dibble of the Yard via our honest-to-goodness MSM, regarding that lawless, wild-west-type of place called Praia Da Luz, what with its thieves, druggies, perverts, stalkers, paedophiles, alcoholics, child-snatchers (and that's just the bin men!!), a thought occurred to me.

WHERE ARE ALL THE CCTV CAMERAS?

Throughout all this sorry story, I have only ever heard of one CCTV camera on the side of some hotel, I think, which was on the route that 'Smithman' sauntered along but when they got round to checking it, it had been wiped clean (surprise, surprise).

So okay. That's one camera. But surely, if all those stories of lawlessness were remotely true, just about every building within a country mile would have been fitted with one.It sort of proves that poor old PdL has very unfairly been given a bad name, if only to HELP the real culprits of the crime.

I think it's a well known fact that CCTV cameras capturing images on the public highway are not permitted in Portugal. The CCTV footage that is captured is on private land and focused on things such as car parks, hotel entrances etc. Hences, because it was weeks until the PJ acted on this, the tapes from the single camera which could possibly have captured any footage - it was focused on a car park - had already been re-recorded.

No mystery, all well covered in, amongst other things, interviews with Mr Amaral

In Portugal there are very strict laws concerning individual privacy. CCTV is for internal security and has to be visibly signalled and the whoever filmed warned. The most common sign is the "Sorria, está a ser filmado".The cameras must be turned to the inside of the property. and capture as little of the outside as possible. That's the reason the Paraiso pictures show very little of the exterior.

Ahahah ... If you think this site theories are so absurd why do you waste your time reading them and interfering in the comments?!... Are you feeling uneasy?... Why?!... It´s a proven fact that there is a "tendency for government agencies to cover-up"...Being so, at least the second case isn´t but a reinforcement of some of Textusa lines of investigation.

Where did G sneak off to when he had been seen? Was someone waiting to collect the child from him at some point in his journey? RoB? Do you think G had anyone in mind spotting him before he set out? And why did no-one else see him?

To answer your questions you just have to understand what the intention was and how all was planned to happen.

Understand that and then see where it went wrong and how they reacted to the sudden change of plans.

PdL is a touristic town, so in early May at 9 -10 pm, it’s completely deserted. The only place where one could be noticed would be going somewhere with people outside or with some movement at a time when most people are in their homes.

The area nearby Kelly’s and Dolphins. That is where Gerry was heading towards when he heads down Rua da Escola Primária.

The idea was for Gerry to be seen carrying a blonde girl so someone was to confirm that an abductor had been seen.

We think the plan was, at around 9 pm, Gerry would take Maddie’s body to its first location nearby.

Return to 5A, where Tanner would be waiting with her daughter, sedated and dressed like Maddie.

Gerry would exit the apartment and Tanner go to the apartment where the T9 kids were sleeping, all sedated.

Gerry would head towards “PdL’s Red Triangle” and assure he would be seen by someone. If he was seen earlier on, the better.

Once seen, return to the building, hand back Tanner’s daughter at the apartment where she was with the kids.

Go to apartment 5A, simulate a break-in and head to Tapas and be noticed there. It wouldn’t be a problem for 5A to have an open window for the next 2 hours as no one was inside it.

At around midnight, the group would return home and be “surprised” by the jemmied window and set the alarm then.

All would have perfect alibis and an abductor had been seen on the other side of town.

That was the plan which Kate mistimed by raising the alarm while Gerry was still walking about.

This meant that Gerry had to hasten his return and instead of going to the apartment where the kids were, he returned directly to 5A.

The creases on the bed near the door indicate that a small child was laid there with her head towards the door as we showed in our “Mistaken Identities” post (01Oct10).http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/10/mistaken-identities.html

The rest is history.

So to answer your questions.

Your question: Where did G sneak off to when he had been seen?

He went down the stairs and as he had his mission accomplished he most likely hid momentarily in the road that exists in the middle of those stairs. He had no reason any more to head towards the “PdL’s Red Triangle”, he had already been seen

Your question: Was someone waiting to collect the child from him at some point in his journey?

Tanner was waiting for him in the apartment where the kids were, explaining why she wasn’t in 5A when Kate went there. If she had been, she would have calmed Kate down and all would have gone according to plan.

Your question: RoB?

Tanner, as explained.

Your question: Do you think G had anyone in mind spotting him before he set out?

Don’t think so. The idea was to be seen. By heading to the only place that had movement, it was most likely to find a Brit as Portuguese locals are not restaurant / bar frequent clients.

Your question: And why did no-one else see him?

PdL is a deserted town in early May at night. Plus it would be unlikely for him to have been seen by anyone, even in August, in the route between 5A and where the sighting happened. The crossing with the Smiths happened by chance. Once it happened there was no need to look any further to find more witnesses.

My ONLY problem with this is that why Gerry would 'risk' being seen and possibly identified later? Seems like he wore his own clothes and didn't try to disguise himself at all - although darkness and limited street light and a child almost obscuring his face might be disguise enough? It's a rather audacious move - deeply cynical and desperate. And to think he had allies in all of this. Extremely creepy. Given the time between then and now and what has happened with the Fund, etc and the tissue of lies on TV and in Kate's book, one can only look on open-mouthed and the criminality of it all. Keep up the great work!

We have dealt with your question in our “To Be Or Not To Be Even A Question” post (18Sept10).http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/09/to-be-or-not-to-be-even-question.html

Insane says that Smithman didn’t make much of an effort to be noticed, so he who isn’t noticed cannot be recognised. That’s according to Insane.

We say he was noticed because he did make an effort to make himself noticed. Smithman forced his contact with the Smiths.

However, one thing is to be noticed, another is to cause an impression to the point of being physically rememembered. We all cross many people in a day and don’t remember any.

And that is the whole point: it was not “asked” of the Smiths to remember who they saw but only to see ONE man (any man) holding ONE blonde girl (any blonde girl that would later become Maddie due to the news) and, if possible, notice that the girl was wearing pyjamas.

If Gerry (Smithman) was asked to draw an e-fit of the Smiths that night, he wouldn’t be able to do it. And we say he forced the contact, so he knew the exact importance of this “meeting”.

The encounter was too short to grasp details. To Gerry he encountered a family of 9/10 people with an Irish accent. He might have grasped the general characteristics of some of the Smiths, for example, the pregnant woman, but he wouldn’t be able to tell her apart from other pregnant women in a line-up.

Also, Mr Amaral states very clearly that from description of the encounter made by the Smiths, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to produce e-fits with such detail as those that were shown in the UK Crimewatch.

What about Jane Tanner? If she's in on the cover-up why would she time her sighting of a man with a child at 09.15 on 3rd May, yet only report it the following day - the day AFTER McCann was wandering the streets with her daughter? Why?

First, thank you for resubmitting your comment NOT published at 13 Apr 2014 19:12:00. As you see, if you submit comments in a respectful and polite manner they will be published.

Second, by stating “If she's [Tanner] in on the cover-up” you openly reveal the true intent of your question and exactly on which side of the fence you sit on. Not many of you out there so far from the fence on that side as it's common understanding that Jane is up to Rob's borrowed fleece involved in the cover-up, as much as any other T9.

Third, we don’t understand your question. What has the timing (at 09.15 on 3rd May) to do with when she reported it? The question you seem to be asking is why didn't Tanner time her sighting around the same time as the Smith sighting? As Gerry had returned and said, I've been seen by an Irish family, why didn't she make sure her timing fitted in better? Please clarify if you will because the way it's put, we don't understand what is being asked.

Fourth, thank you for pointing out that the following day was the day AFTER the Smith Sighting. Before helping us any further, let us tell you that we’re fully aware that two days afterwards would be two days AFTER, three days afterwards would be three days AFTER and so on.

Fifth, the question is not why report it only the following day but to understand why didn’t she report it immediately to the parents even before authorities were called in.

We have explained, sufficiently for now, what we think about Tanner’s Sighting in these 2 posts:http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/10/tanners-abductor-tale-told-by-special.html (30Oct10)http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/11/way-i-see-what-tanner-saw.html (01Nov10)

By the way, and not saying you are, doubting that Tanner didn’t see a man that night is to call SY liars.

In UK CW they don’t say Tanner didn’t see anything but do say that Tanner did see a man who wasn’t Tannerman but Crèche Dad, a British citizen the Met has questioned, as well as his family, to come to that conclusion.

So, according to Tanner (and the McCanns by maintaining Tannerman on the website) she saw, from the street, Tannerman abducting Maddie; according to SY, she saw, from the street, Crèche Dad taking daughter home after picking her up from night crèche and according to us she saw, from inside apartment 5A, Gerry carrying a dead Maddie to a nearby house before starting his walk with Tanner’s sedated daughter in his arms in the direction of “PdL’s Red Triangle” in which he was seen by the Smiths in the Rua da Escola Primária.

Thank you for the reply.First, I don't know what you mean by 'the true intent' of my question. It seems a perfectly innocent querie to me.Second, my pevious comment was polite as far as I recall.Third, to reiterate. If the Tapas plan was to parade the 'sedated' child of JT through the streets of PDL at 10 pm, no mean feat requiring much composure and nerves of steel considering the potential consequences, why would Tanner report a completely different sighting at 09.15. The Tapas 'plan' was for 10 .pm. and it was succesfully carried out. McCann was seen.Fourth, I emphasised the word AFTER because the Tapas group would have known by then that the cunning plan was a stunning success. All they had to do was sit back and wait for the Smiths to report it. They didn't know the Smith family would take so long. So why would Tanner come alng with a complete red-herring? Just asking.

By your own reckoning, if McCann was parading Tanner's daughterthrough the streets at 10pm, and Kate sounded the alarm then yes - they raised the alarm when Mccann was not present. This is what you suggest, isn't it?

However we say the alarm, at 22.00, was raised prematurely (exactly because Gerry was out and about) while you said the alarm, at 22.00, was raised according to plan, which, in your opinion, was successfully executed.

So will ask again if, according to you, the T9 plan was to raise the alarm while Gerry was out?

It's hard to see how a conspiracy that involved meticulous planning between a group of people could go so pearshaped at the exact time of execution ie. 10 pm. By success I mean McCann had been spotted - job done. How could Kate have cocked up so badly by raising the alarm prematurely. Why do you believe this, I find it difficult to fathom.

I'm not saying Kate's raising of the alarm was part of the plan. the 'plan' i.e. to have Mccann wander the streets with Tanner's daughter is your theory not mine. I'm asking if your theory has any credibility why did Kate not wait for McCan to return before raising the alarm? Do you not think she was 'in on it'? Also Tanner who, according to your theory, was certainly involved, why then does she go 'off script' and report a sighting at 9.15 at a time when the conspirators would have been on tenterhooks waiting for the Smiths to come forward with news of the sighting of mccan that was so meticulously planned? It doesn't make sense.Incidentally, I am not being supportive of the McCanns. I want the truth of what really happened to Madeleine to be exposed as much as anyone else on this site.

Your words: "The Tapas 'plan' was for 10 .pm. and it was succesfully carried out. McCann was seen."

Don't see where Tanner's sighting at 21.15 conflicts in any way with the Smith Sighting at 22.00 or why is that going "off-script".

It is our opinion that a man did carry a child (Maddie) going East on Rua Doutor Agostinho da Silva at around 21.15.

It is our opinion that this man was Gerry McCann. It is our opinion that Jane Tanner happens to be the only person seeing him.

She sticks to this time because she cannot know then if anyone else (for example, someone on a balcony on nearby buildings) would have seen that man, so she's truthful in describing what she saw and when she saw it. The only lie was to leave out the fact that she knew very well who that "stranger" was.

Why Kate raised the alarm at 10 and not wait until Gerry had returned is a question that all Black Hats, including yourself, still ask to this day.

thanks for your reply. Two points: first, when Tanner spotted 'abductor' at 9.15 she also passed McCann who was speaking with a tennis-playing pal who verifies McCann's presence. Where does this pal fit in? Is he lying in your opinion? Second, I don't understand your final point as I don't know what a Black Hat is. I do understand why the question about Kate raising the alarm at 10 pm is significant in relation to McCann wandering the streets with a sedated child at that time. Your theory. What do you think?

Let’s first look at the first time you placed this question, which was 8 days ago in an unpublished comment:

“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Speed":

Ok, so where does the Tanner sighting sit amid all this speculation? Why would she time her fictitious sighting at 09.15 and keep quiet about it until next day, even though Gerry was out and about at 10.00pm. What would be the point of two sightings at very different times? That is assuming she was in on the cover-up, which is what you believe, Text. Maybe she's not in on it at all, and she did see someone, and the Met have identified him as they say they have. I can't see how JT can be lending out her sedated daughter to be paraded around PDL whilst coming out with a cock and bull sighting which contradicts McCann.

Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 19:12:00”

We did not publish this because as it assumes all is speculation what follows can only be rhetorical questions.

Words “speculation” and “cock and bull sighting” aren’t exactly the expressions used by someone who alleges to “want the truth of what really happened to Madeleine to be exposed as much as anyone else on this site”.

As we have said, please keep track of what you submit. Not doing so makes you look silly.

We will wait for you to explain why Tanner’s sighting contradicts the Smith one.

We have shown how we think Jez Wilkins has lied by showing there were no Tapas dinners so it wasn’t at Tapas that he and Gerry talked around the BRT about the checking system on the previous night.

We, in our opinion, don’t have any sort of doubt that he lied about that particular conversation, in terms of location (no BRT) and content (no checking system).

We find it strange why would a man needing to go to a toilet while walking his child to sleep in a stroller, would choose to enter the Tapas complex (which means going up small stairs) and use the clients’ facilities there with said stroller when he could have simply walked back to his apartment, used the toilet, and got out again. No, not saying he’s lying, just finding it strange.

About his encounter with Gerry, at around 21.15 on May 3, we have every reason to believe it happened.

We know that, in our opinion, Gerry was obliged to lay the body on the flowerbed on the SW corner of the apartment’s backyard. The cadaver dog signalled cadaverine there. Something, or someone, stalled Gerry on his trip while taking the body out of the apartment.

For us it’s credible that it would be Jez, indeed walking his child in a stroller. At this point in time, Jez is not in the loop and entertains a natural small talk between people who know each other and cross with one another in the middle of the street.

You say he and Gerry know each other from tennis, we are the opinion they know each other from other activities.

Jez does not see Jane because Jane never passed them. Jane sees, in our opinion, the conversation from inside apartment 5A while accompanying, visually, Gerry's trip as according to plan. She sees him being interrupted and speaks of this encounter because she assumes that both Jez (why he doesn't we will say why next) and Gerry would back up her story. Neither do. Probably because neither wanted to compromise themselves with the Tannerman sighting.

Jez doesn’t see Gerry/Tannerman because Gerry waits for him to get out of sight to go a retrieve Maddie’s body and continue his mission of taking Maddie’s body away from apartment.

Jez, on the night of the 3rd, is an innocent bystander. But after that night, just like the Tapas staff and other guests, is asked to “confirm” the Tapas dinners and the rasta man. Probably when asked to confirm the existence of Tannerman during the conversation with Gerry, he refused. That would be taking too much part in the lie.

A gay celebrity who is alleged to have groomed a teenager before he killed himself has contacted the youth’s grieving family to ‘explain’ their relationship.

But last night the parents of Ben Cowburn spoke of their dismay at the TV comedian’s use of high-profile libel lawyers Carter-Ruck to make the approach.

The Cowburns have so far refused to respond, insisting the celebrity – known only as Mr X after a coroner controversially protected his identity – should first be questioned by the Metropolitan Police...

THE MET,HA,HA ,HA,HA,HA!Those f****** ,are on the criminals pay rolls!Barrymore walked,when the guy was found drowned on his property,the met have been told to let the mccanns off.That lad,the comedian groomed,was given drugs,also drugs with the Barrymore guy.Liverpool

We have, up to now, NOT published 8 comments received from Insane at the following times:- Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 15:24:00- Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 15:26:00- Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 15:29:00- Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 20:00:00- Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 23:36:00- Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 16:06:00- Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 16:08:00- Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 16:12:00

A rather surprising level of participation for a post. It pleases us. It confirms that we are on the right track.

In none of these 10 comments does Insane speak about Gerry not making his appeal until after the Smith family had made their statements and that this fact had been published in the media.

Insane should keep track of what is submitted.

It’s true that Gerry makes his appeal after the 3 Smiths made their statements. The Smiths come to Portugal in the end of May and the appeal was on June 9th.

The question being discussed was the timespan between the Smith Sighting on 3 May and the Smiths coming forward weeks later at a time the whole wide world (and we’re not talking about just the internet) was speaking almost exclusively about Maddie McCann.

The ref about the appeal is linked with the interest shown by Gerry, more than a month later after the sighting happened, for the Irish (and Dutch) tourists to come forward.

Irrelevant of the fact the Smiths had already spoken or not with the PJ, it’s a fact that Gerry shows unusual interest, more than a month after, in a nationality that by coincidence happens to be that of the family which Smithman crossed with.

Insane may allege that a local Drogheda rag reports the sighting on June 6th and the appeal is on June 9th. Besides this single piece of news on June 6th, the Smith Sighting is only mentioned again by any media, local or otherwise, in August.

We will disregard for the moment the fact we’re talking about one single piece of news on a local rag at a time when literally hundreds of thousands of newspapers worldwide (was there a single paper, national, regional or local that didn’t cover Maddie?) were putting out news on the subject.

Let’s imagine Gerry read it. Why not specify it in the appeal? Why didn't he say something like “we have recently been told a family from Drogheda saw a man carrying a child”?

And why include the Dutch tourists?

If he didn’t read the Drogheda rag, then why the wild guess on the Irish?

Textusa, Gerry on his blog entry where he makes his appeal on June 9 speaks of recording Crimecall on that date. You say media didn't treat the Smith Sighting until August. Are you taking into the account the airing of this show? It would be between June 9 and August, right?

Gerry says this: "Day 37 June 9th 2007 After returning from the beach we did the Irish version of Crimewatch-‘Crimecall".

He does not speak of content of the show. And as he, on that day, after the recordings, appeals to unspecific Irish tourists ("there are a lot of Irish tourists" and "we want the Irish public to come forward") we doubt that the program referred in any way the Smiths.

If proven the contrary, we will obviously acknowledge. We cannot say whether the Smiths were topic or not as we are not familiar with that particular show, nor when it aired.

I'm Anon 23:13Tuesday 19th June. Crimecall aired In Ireland (McCann Files timeline) but not in UK.The interview extract I listened to doesn't mention the Smith family sighting. The McCanns talk of their Donegal holiday and the support they have received from the Irish people.Crimecall starts by saying they don't usually cover crimes outside Ireland, but in this case, they cite family links to Ireland as one of the reasons they made an exception in this case.You were right, so need to acknowledge anything Textusa.

First- I believe Gerry trip was intentional. If not, they could choose to raise the alarm much later that evening or on the next morning with another rubbish excuse, for what they are "experts". The alarm time was planned- later enough to trouble the police with the searches on the terrain and later enough to have somebody on the streets, but not many, and specially not locals, who could ruin the plan.

2- The itinerary of the trip was well planned. Gerry headed that way because he knows he could be spotted by somebody. They were at the end of their holidays. Contrary to what they want the world to believe, I think they spend their nights at the Chaplin's and other pubs. They know who use to be there and up to each time. In a small town on a low season, guests tend to have a small rotine, specially if they like one pub or café and not a big offer is available. For me, some of this pubs were also meeting points for swingers.

3- I tend to believe, Gerry knows the Smiths and their rotines, even if not personally ( I mean, where the Smiths use to go and up to each time they use to be out). He had the help of people knowing well PDL and the Smiths use to spend their holidays there. Murat knows the Smiths because the Smiths highlighted that to PJ when they eliminated him from being the man they spotted. Gerry dennounced that knowledge when, while being bothered by the absence of any evidence of an abduction, he Invited the Ireland family to come forward. So many small details play a huge roll to solve that case. It is all there for SY to see, If they wanted. The crime is not anymore " only the mysterious disappearance of a little girl". It is a cocktail of crimes: Disappearence, concealing of a body, geopardizing the investigation, obstruction to justice, deliberated planting of sights and witnesses, corruption, cover up, fraudulent fund, planned misinformation, delapidation of public taxes which could be used to search other missing people who had chances to be found alive if the same effort were applied and so on........

4- After many years of investigation and after many months after reopening it, SY did not find a usefull argument to dismiss the claim the Smiths made while watching Gerry arriving to UK, the claim of being Gerry the man they saw on the fatidic night carrying a child on the way to the beach. It is like, if SY avoids to touch that subject. The egg man was ridiculous transformed into a dad man carrying his child not from the creche, but on the way to the creche, later night. Dark humor, from SY or the result of being framed against a wall? After years, they produced nothing....but are very cautious when the subject is the Smiths sight. Unfortunately, even after having the same opinion as MR Amaral, that the Smiths were crucial, I think now they are already scared by the Mccann's lawyers and the power they tried to pass and their statements will be significantly different then if they were officially invited as witnesses on the early days after May 3, 2007. Unless, they were called by a court in Portugal as witnesses and forced to talk without lying. A witness can't lie in court. A lie changes their status in to arguidos.

Yes, the Smiths must be called to Lisbon by a court. They could play the most important step to solve this case- telling exactely what they saw, without being affraid of the consequences ( Carter-Ruck), or aligning with the rest of the people involved in the game and be part of the cover up. A clever and experient judge must interrogate them and if they are honest, they must help Maddie to achieve justice.No matter, who Gerry was carrying that night. If he was seen heading to the beach, while carrying a child later that night, means that what he was doing was after the time the police believe Maddie disappeared. He must have being searching his daughter, looking for help or protecting the twins from any other wrong event that night, IF HE REALLY BELIEVES AND ABDUCTOR TOOK HIS DAUGHTER. Any Judge will question what made him to have that decision and Gerry needs to provide a good explanation, not the usual rubbish delivered by his spoke man or the perverted media.Wasn't significant the absolute silence of their family after the case being reopenned? Aunty Phill and the grannies, lost their energy to search they beloved one?

Textusa,I don’t subscribe your swinging theory. It makes sense, it’s possible and I agree it would warrant a cover-up. I happen to think there’s something greater to cover-up than swinging: paedophilia.You have called it a Stink Bomb and I’m curious about your explanations why you think that.I don’t think it’s a Stink Bomb at all and think it’s the big secret behind the cover-up.You point the finger at Payne in having to do with Maddie’s death (I recall you being the first to do that in Joana’s) but have minimised all possibility of all this being the lid being kept on a a paedo crime committed by Payne.He was identified by Yvonne Martin as paedo, or involved in paedo processes in UK. He was very rude to her.The Gaspars identify clearly paedo behaviours in his conversation with Gerry when talking about Maddie.Gerry has an empty CATS files.He bathed other people’s little children during the holiday where the Gaspars were present. He bathed Gaspars’ daughter, for example.He was the last person to see Maddie alive and describes the situation in very strange terms of white angels and all so peaceful.There are also other things that make me thing that this is all about paedophilia:He is the one that suggests and organises the holiday and he is the one that says who stays in what apartmentHe is the one that doesn’t need to check his children because he has a baby monitor that works great distances and because of this is the only male of the group who doesn’t leave the dinner table.He is the one who filmed that moment with Gerry swearing in front of all including children on an airport bus and I think he was the one who uploaded the video on YouTube.He was the one that was heard in the rogatory statements after the Portuguese cops had left the UK. All others were heard when they were there. Also I think he says that the right forum is not to be there answering the rogatory questions.I think all this points much more to paedophilia than to swinging. So why call it a Stink Bomb like you have?

Two things I would like to add about David Payne:- Paynes are the only family/couple not represented in 2009 documentary. Jane, Gerry and Matt but no one from the Paynes- Paynes don't "appear" in 2013 UK CW. They're only shown arriving at the table but we can't even make out their faces.

45 year old man, Eden Kane charged with abduction. Said not to be known to family and got in through a window.The child can't be named now for legal reasons.Said to have taken her because he felt sorry for the way she lived.

Insane’s nom-de-guerre was given by him or herself. It comes from an Anonymous comment submitted by the character in our Blogeditorial Decision on the "Maddie McCann Case":

“Anonymous 18 Feb 2011 22:15:00

Don't be ridiculous, Textusa

At least four Tapas employees gave witness testimory stating that the McCanns dined there on 3rd May, as did Steven Carpenter, a fellow holidaymaker. Are you seriously suggesting that all these people have conspired together, with the McCanns and their friends to give false testimony?

Insane is our pet troll. We’re not aware of any other blog having someone exclusively dedicated to fight them. We have. It honours us.

We have even written a post, “Insane's Plea to Temporary Insanity” (07Mar11), dedicated to him/her, where we highlight how the Tapas staff were singing from the same hymn sheet in the first 24 hours after Maddie had disappeared.

Madeleine McCann police on trail of five British holiday flat owners - but they are refusing to cooperate

British detectives want to quiz them over who was in their apartments when the tot was abducted seven years ago

Madeleine McCann police are trying to trace five mystery Britons who owned flats in the block where she vanished.

British detectives want to quiz them over who was in their apartments when the tot was abducted seven years ago.

But we can reveal all five – whose identities have been withheld from police under Portuguese data protection laws – have allegedly refused to allow managers at the Algarve complex to pass their details to the Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange team.

A source said: “They could hold vital clues to what happened. But it is down to the individuals if they want to get involved.

“They were all asked by email if they were happy for their names to be put forward to the investigation – and they said they were not.

“It may be that they did not want to get caught up in such a high profile case, but they could know something critical about Madeleine’s disappearance and may not even be aware of it.”

Police are working on the theory that three-year-old Madeleine’s abductor spied on her from inside the 59-block Ocean Club complex of holiday flats in Praia da Luz.

Nearly all of the owners at the time were believed to be British and it has been claimed some properties may have been sub-let during May 2007 without the owners’ knowledge.

Anybody with access to certain ¬apartments could easily have kept an eye on the McCanns’ movements without ¬looking suspicious.

Madeleine’s dad Gerry has said he thinks they were being watched throughout their family break in ¬apartment 5A.

Officers are believed to have ¬questioned owners of all but five of the remaining 58 flats after they agreed to help the investigation.

They have pinpointed the mystery leaseholders as “persons of interest” who could help them unlock the case although none are suspected of wrongdoing.

But Scotland Yard has been hampered by a combination of data protection regulations and the botched original Portuguese investigation.

It is understood that a full list of owners was never made available even to local police.

Sub-letting at the complex has made ¬detectives’ work even harder as they try to build a picture of who was where at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance.

Our source said: “Operation Grange is trying to gather data through several agencies to collate a full picture of who was at the resort at that time.

how conveniently it is always forgotten that it was not just a portuguese police investigation...there was a team of british police working with the PJ during the whole investigation, they only left Portugal when the McCanns left (fled...)! I ask, if it was a "botched" investigation, WHO botched it...? WHO sabotaged the investigation...? Note that the british police officers that were in Portugal "helping" the investigation were NOT in Portugal to help find Madeleine or what happened to her...they proved they were not when they left the country with the McCanns. If they were here to find Madeleine they would not have left, not until the investigation was over. By leaving Portugal in block, "escorting" the McCanns, they showed who they were really in Portugal for, what their "cooperation" with the PJ was really for...protecting the McCanns, NOT helping to find a missing child !

“The frustrations at Scotland Yard are growing day by day,” said our source. "

Good! They are tasting a bit of their own remedy! Mr. Amaral's investigation also suffered an immense frustation at the lack of cooperation from the british authorities...remember the rogatory letters saga...? The long wait for response over the medical and finantial records of the McCanns?

One can only hope...the spotlight will go from apartment owners to...apartment renters! Certain apartment renters,in the Waterside Gardens block 5, from the 28th April 2007...apartments 5A, 5B, 5D, and 5H...

Mystery people contacted by e-mail, that must be a first. Would someone please provide SY with Jack-the-Ripper's mail?Where's the criticism about the silence laws in Portugal now? Then the McCanns said they wanted to speak but couldn't because of those Portuguese laws so why won't they speak now?

How on earth did Gerry manage to get his wallet stolen as he was using an ATM machine in Waterloo station if he DID NOT have any bank cards?! What the heck did he put inside the ATM card slot? Or the McCanns are sooo special that even ATMs give them money just on voice request?!

What a rubbish attitude from SY- it is everything, everyones fault, always blaming others:

- "the Botched portuguese investigation", when the british were on it since minute one and even brought to Portugal top dogs with a golden nose to snif blood and cadaverine but they forgot to train the dogs for convennient results " what they find is only valid and acceptable if connected to a strange of the group or parents. 100% accepted if an infime shadow of possibility pointed the nose of the dogs to a portuguese working in the Resort.

- The poor cooperation of the owners of the flats. What a stupid excuse, specially because was largelly publicized in 2007, the existence of a list of british Paedos living or visiting the Algarve but hidden from the portuguese authorities due to identity protection. Properties in Portugal are registered and it is easy to know to who belongs any property. Asking that is not a violation of anything and did not require any permission. SY trying to fool the british readers because their investigation produced nothing and they have to stick with what the joined investigation achieved in 2007 and is on the files. Personally, I believe a flat / house owned by a british holds some keys to solve that case since all indicates that the body was moved from 5a to a different location before being transfered to the scenic ( one house/ flat or more then one) and for obvious reasons, I believe this was done with the permission of the owner or with the permission of who had the keys of that properties. Mr Amaral said that all neighbours and flats were investigated and visited by the police on the first days, but since the all involved in the case are proven liars and the OC was made of flats spreaded around PDL and they were probably the source of the list of flats provided to PJ, will be not a surprise if they don't include on the list given to PJ the most important flats for the investigation. Then, obviously there is flats with interest and SY just don't quiz the owners if they don't want. Refusing to cooperate with the police is obstruting the investigation, even because neighbours can talk and give the picture the police is looking for, like Mccann's neighbour said to PJ, she found strange why the back gate of the scenic was left open at night.

- The portuguese Judge who is not giving a green light to the rogatory letters and the iminent arrest. Another rubbish. The private detectives have been in Algarve knocking on everyones door and bothering workers and neighbours with questions. Nobody prevented them to do it and they were not charged with any illegality. Then, who is preventing SY to do the same and find the girl? Only their strategy to pretend they are investigating when in fact they are just playing with the media a convennient game to clear the Mccann's and do nothing to explain what happen to their daughter.

Is everything in PJ Files, that is the main message to retrieve from all shameful british articles.

Buoyed by the escape of three Cleveland women held for a decade, Madeleine McCann’s parents now have a new lead: 20 ‘persons of interest’ who may have details of her 2007 disappearance.

It is hard to imagine the roller-coaster nightmare that Madeleine McCann’s parents must be going through. Six years have passed since Madeleine, then just shy of her 4th birthday, disappeared from a vacation apartment in the Algarve, Portugal, where she and her younger twin siblings were asleep. Her parents, Kate and Gerry, were considered primary suspects early on in the investigation by haphazard Portuguese police who focused erroneously on the couple from the moment the young girl disappeared, likely letting the real suspects escape justice. They also have been chastised in the court of public opinion for leaving their young children unattended in the gated community while they dined with friends at a tapas bar about 50 yards away, even though the adults took turns checking on the sleeping children every half-hour. They have endured a nasty Internet hate campaign, with Kate receiving regular death threats. Their hopes have been raised by numerous sightings of their daughter on German airplanes, Spanish campgrounds, and New Zealand supermarkets, only to be dashed as each lookalike child proves not to be young Madeleine.

Now the McCanns have been given a new reason to be optimistic. They were bolstered earlier this month by news of the Cleveland trio of kidnapping victims who escaped alive after a decade in captivity. “Their recovery is also further evidence that children are sometimes abducted and kept for long periods,” the McCanns said in a statement after the Ohio case came to light. “So we ask the public to remain vigilant in the ongoing search for Madeleine. Our thoughts are with the women in America and their families.”

Over the weekend, they were given even more fresh hope after Scotland Yard investigators, reviewing the work of the Portuguese police under a multimillion-dollar shadow investigation called Operation Grange, said they had pinpointed more than 20 “persons of interest” who may have vital information about Madeleine’s disappearance. The list includes many previously known characters, including a troupe of British freelance cleaners whose white van was spotted in the area when she disappeared. But there are also plenty of new names on the list, including a middle-aged mystery couple who supposedly rented a flat near the McCanns during the same period in 2007. The couple, whose names have not been released, told Pamela Fenn, who lived above the McCann rental apartment, that they had opened the unlocked door to the McCanns’ apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared to comfort the young child, whose cries were allegedly audible from their own apartment.

According to Fenn’s statement, it was well known that the McCanns had made it a habit to dine nearby after they put their children to bed, but it was also a common practice by other holidaymakers in the secure gated resort. It also was reportedly common knowledge that the young child’s cries were heard on more than one occasion when her parents were out, according to Fenn’s statement, which is in the Portuguese dossier and thus subject to Scotland Yard’s review. Fenn, who died two years ago, told Portuguese police about the couple, but because police were so focused on the McCanns as suspects, they apparently did not find the mystery couple’s alleged interference with the missing child relevant. Now Scotland Yard officials reportedly are urging the Portuguese police to reopen the case and find both the mystery couple and the British cleaners. Because of jurisdiction issues, only the Portuguese police can make arrests in the case, which has been officially closed in Portugal since 2008, making it vitally important that they reopen the case to pursue any new evidence laid bare by the Operation Grange detectives.

The British detectives also have pointed to a number of undocumented laborers worth checking out, from clandestine maintenance workers to seasonal gardeners who were working in the black-market economy and who may not have been sufficiently vetted to work in a family resort. And there were reportedly a number of apartments in the resort that were rented out under the radar to avoid taxes. Those renters would not have had to register their passports to stay on the premises.

The McCanns have not given an official statement on the news of the new suspects in the case, but according to British press reports, their spokesperson said they were optimistic about the news: “They have been encouraged from the moment the review started and are now greatly encouraged that police have drawn up a short list of people who they believe are of interest to the inquiry.”

But like so many of the false starts and abrupt twists and turns of this six-year saga, not even the best new leads will mean anything until the McCanns have their daughter back—or at least find out the truth about what really happened to her the night she disappeared.

Interesting to see an article written in 20May10 which may explain the recent article about SY trying to get details of homeowners.

We think the mystery couple, who apparently RENTED, aren't so much of a mystery to everyone.

If one is to believe Fenn lived in the apartment above 5A, it seems this couple, who were GUESTS, were so disturbed by Maddie’s crying that they exited their own apartment, went around the building (front door unless open ajar needs a key to be opened), walked into 5A via backgate, up the stairs and sliding doors and soothed Maddie and then returned to their apartment and even with all the media hype, never told the police about this.

First obvious detail, is that Maddie cried really, really loud.

So, like we said in our “All Paths Lead to Rome” (20Nov10) it is rather strange that none of the T9 heard Maddie cry on the “checking” they say they did. “Checking” that never happened as there were no Tapas dinners.http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/11/all-paths-lead-to-rome.html

Second, it begs the question, where does this “mystery couple’s” soothing episode fit in the 75 minutes of Maddie’s uninterrupted crying, according to Mrs Fenn.

How could Mrs Fenn listen to a child crying loudly for such a long time, when all she needed to do was call the OC 24 hour reception? The child could have been injured. Or she could have gone down to check,in case there was somebody with her. I find this story difficult to believe.

Mrs Fenn didn't exactly tell the truth.. She Initially told the press it was nonsense that she had said anything to police, after making a statements then fails to report the soothing couple incident or Paynes balcony appearance, as recently revealed by Mr Amaral, when she did make her statement.What made her decide to say more later?

Mrs Fenn said nothing of the kind to the press. She stated on camera, on the only occasion that she spoke at all, that she had never spoken to the press, and that it was entirely fabricated.

Nor did she at any point claim to have seen or spoken to this hypothetical ''soothing couple''. Perhaps you can provide a reference to Mr Amaral claiming this, and if he did we can discuss why he waited until 6 years had gone by, and Mrs Fenn had passed away, to mention it?

We have never said there was a soothing couple. Daily Beast is the one who speaks about this couple and saying that Mrs Fenn informed the Police about them:

“The couple, whose names have not been released, told Pamela Fenn, who lived above the McCann rental apartment, that they had opened the unlocked door to the McCanns’ apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared to comfort the young child, whose cries were allegedly audible from their own apartment.According to Fenn’s statement, it was well known that the McCanns had made it a habit to dine nearby after they put their children to bed, but it was also a common practice by other holidaymakers in the secure gated resort. It also was reportedly common knowledge that the young child’s cries were heard on more than one occasion when her parents were out, according to Fenn’s statement, which is in the Portuguese dossier and thus subject to Scotland Yard’s review. FENN, who died two years ago, TOLD PORTUGUESE POLICE ABOUT THE COUPLE, but because police were so focused on the McCanns as suspects, they apparently did not find the mystery couple’s alleged interference with the missing child relevant.”

Daily Beast is a US news reporting website founded by Tina Brown, editor of Vanity Fair and New Yorker

We only noted that if the couple did go and soothe Maddie, then it wouldn’t fit with Mrs Fenn’s story.

Mr Amaral does not make any ref to the “soothing couple”.

Anonymous 21 Apr 2014 09:29:00, speaks of “…or Paynes balcony appearance, as recently revealed by Mr Amaral”. Anon is referring to the fact that Mr Amaral clearly stated on CMTV that Mrs Fenn has said that she saw David Payne on the balcony of apartment 5A around 19.00, on 3 May.

That is not on Mrs Fenn’s statement. So it can only be because she decided to say more later as anon says.

“Why he waited until 6 years had gone by, and Mrs Fenn had passed away, to mention it” is a question that only Mr Amaral can answer.

As the 7th Madeleine disappearance anniversary approaches, a British newspaper has been slammed for publishing an ‘old story’ masquerading as a new lead.

The Daily Mirror reported on Saturday that detectives “working hard” on Operation Grange are trying to trace five mystery Britons who owned flats in the block in Praia da Luz from which Madeleine vanished on May 3, 2007.

It is a story that first appeared in 2013, in the same paper - although then detectives were only looking for FOUR apartment owners.

Said one critic, a retired British policeman who has been closely following the Metropolitan Police investigation since it began nearly three years ago: “Is this really the sum total of another year’s ‘hard work’?

“Has Scotland Yard spent another million, eight more visits to the PJ and a whole year - NOT finding out who owns those apartments? Honestly?”

According to the policeman, the source for this latest rehash story - “as well as all the others that have preceded it” - is the McCann’s press spokesman, Clarence Mitchell.

In 2008, Mitchell was described by former Portuguese police federation chief Carlos Anjos as a man who “lies with as many teeth as he has in his head”.

“Mitchell is still clearly in charge of this rubbish”, the retired policeman told Algarve Resident. “Why does no one expose him?”

This latest criticism came on the same day that the Algarve Resident received a call from local people in Luz asking us NOT to make any reference to the looming anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance.

“Every year it is the same”, the principal caller complained. “We are really appealing to you to not carry anything on the day. Just let it pass. If things go on as they are, newspapers will still be writing about this story in 25 years time!”

It is a valid point, but as a recent story on attitudes in Praia da Luz showed (see our printed edition of April 2, or http://portugalresident.com/%E2%80%98please-help-luz%E2%80%99-plea-as-ma...) opinions on the mystery remain divided.

Much as locals may wish for an end to the media spotlight, interest in the story remains astonishing - hence the never-ending repeat revelations, particularly in the British media.

This latest by the Mirror centres on the apparent unwillingness of the five British apartment owners to cooperate with Operation Grange.And a new message within the body of the text highlights "the frustrations" that are reportedly growing every day between British police and their Portuguese counterparts.

Says the Mirror, Grange detectives are “having to tread on eggshells”.

“They would happily go round Praia da Luz and knock on doors asking everybody for information if they could, but they are still waiting for permission on the international letters of request they have sent to the Portuguese”.

One point, however - mentioned both in the ‘new’ story over the Easter weekend, and the story published by the Mirror in 2013 - is that Madeleine’s father Gerry McCann has said he feels the family were being watched throughout their fateful holiday.

“If that truly is the case”, said the retired policeman in touch with Algarve Resident, “why on earth would he have left his children asleep on their own in the holiday apartment?”

Seven years on, over seven million euros spent on Operation Grange - not to mention money being ploughed into the reopened Portuguese police investigation - and despite all the ‘new’ stories, no one appears to have any answers as to what really happened to three-year-old Madeleine McCann.

Mrs Fenn was part of the gang involved with the cover up. All points to her be a good friend of Murat's mother. Then, not hard to believe, she knows other british people living in PDL, where I include TS and the guy that handed the church keys to the Mccann's, which was not the catholic priest. We just need to read attentivelly all that was delivered by papers, investigation and some characters, during all this years and connect the dots. Now, the picture is quite clear. If SY did not see it, it's only because they don't want to.I think, PJ will be clever enough to give time, with a lot of pacience, for SY to get knot on their own rope. When all the avenues become closed what will be left? THE EVIDENCES LARGELLY KNOWN BY BOTH POLICES AND AVAILABLE SINCE THE FIRST MONTHS. Mrs Fenn is a master piece on the cover up....very undestandable, why she did not provide everything she knows to the police at the beguining . She was used to deliver what was more convennient. Did somebody believe that anyone enter a flat, even on holidays to calm an unknown child? NON. Unless they know the child and the family. Unless they were there to share the same type of holidays- swing. Should we imply that Mrs Fenn and the US paper were pointing to swing in the resort, even without clearly saying it? Too much couples around in a low season.

There is nothing quite like a traditional, English church fair held under sunny skies, with home-made cakes, jam, assorted stalls and games, plus that unique community friendship guaranteed to make everyone happy.

Visitors and stall holders alike agreed that ST VINCENT’S ANGLICAN CHURCH did all this and more at their event held on June 11, on the main lawn under huge palm trees and around the courtyards of the Eiras Velhas estate in Almadena. Altogether, JUST UNDER 400 PEOPLE ATTENDED the event, with 23 different traders and stall holders taking part.

Fundraising co-ordinator Les Johnson and his wife Christine, together with an enthusiastic team of helpers from the Luz/Lagos area, did a brilliant job in making it all happen. Nostalgic music was provided on the keyboard by Nick Downs, while Oz Shade Sails provided welcome shade in the food courtyard adjoining the PlantScape garden centre.

The Eiras Velhas resident art group, formed by Rosamunde Gale and under the tutelage of Brendan West, put on an exhibition showing the wide range of subjects and media used in their twice weekly sessions.* For those wanting a perfect lawn, John Cowan chose the event to launch his range of artificial grass. Elsewhere were gifts from India, books old and new, patio furniture, plants, ladies’ fashion and, of course, traditional white elephant stalls.

ST VINCENT’S LOCUM ASSISTANT CHAPLAIN, FATHER HAYNES HUBBARD, HIS WIFE SUSAN and children Gabriel and Sebastian, put their full energy into the day. Although occupying only a brief tenure, FATHER HAYNES, whose parish is in Ontario near Niagara Falls, inspired HIS LUZ CONGREGATION and was clearly a hit among visitors to the fair. He has now left for pastures new and we wish him and his family well.

St Vincent’s Christmas Fair will be held for the second time at Eiras Velhas on November 26, and those interested in taking part should contact Les Johnson on 918 966 015.

For more information on art classes, whether beginners or experienced artists, contact Brendan West on 282 788 516 or Rosamunde Gale on 282 697462.

2005!!!Weren't we all told/sold the tale that Rev Haynes was assigned to the Luz parish in May 2007?!

The article clearly nominates Haynes as the "ST VINCENT’S LOCUM ASSISTANT CHAPLAIN" and Luz as "HIS LUZ CONGREGATION", and all this in 2005! Unless the date in the article is wrong, this is quite damning for Rev. Haynes...why make believe he arrived at Luz in 2007, when it seems he was there alredy in 2005 as the assistant priest to the Reverend that left in 2007 (can't remember his name now, an older man)?!

He said: “There are a lot of people of interest. There are people who could be properly explored further, if only to be eliminated.”

Scotland Yard officers have been interviewing witnesses here for months, although the public prosecutor in Portugal has decided against reopening the investigation.

Despite claims of a “Mexican stand off” between Portuguese police and Yard officers, the Sunday Express understands there is in fact very good co-operation between both squads.

Pedro de Carmo, deputy national leader of the PJ, said yesterday: “We still co-operate with their team. There are good communications.”

Portuguese officers are very impressed with the diligence of the Met investigation and have been impressed with their interviews with witnesses in Britain.

We can confirm that a couple staying in the same block as apartment 5a were interviewed last February.

They were in their apartment on the night Madeleine vanished. Afterwards they wrote an account of what they saw but were never formally interviewed by Portuguese detectives.They had been at a restaurant earlier in the evening and left at about 9pm.

On their way home they walked directly past the entrance to the Ocean Club pool, where the “Tapas 7” (the name given to the friends eating with the McCanns on the night Madeleine disappeared) were enjoying the meal with Kate and Gerry.

They walked past apartment 5a but noticed nothing untoward. The woman said in her statement: “I stood on the balcony at about 9.15 with a whisky.

I remember reading (once upon a time...) that one night, some Ocean Club staff had to go and fetch the McCanns from Chaplins bar, because of other guests complaints about crying children in 5A. I bet that if anyone entered the Mccanns apartment to sooth the children, they were probably O.Club staff, not other holidayers...

“I saw people eating at the tapas bar and children in the play area. We went to bed at 10pm-ish. We were woken up by our bell ringing at 11.30pm. It was a friend of the McCanns, saying that a little girl had been abducted. The friend asked if we had a computer so they could get the media involved in the search.

“Two police were on the corner of our block, one lady said that off-duty police had come and were searching. We did see single men on mobiles while we were out who could have been police.”

The couple took part in the search for Madeleine and then returned to their apartment.

The woman’s statement continues: “We walked back up towards our apartment, a group had gathered on the corner. The McCanns were in bits, he was crying on the shoulder of a friend.

She was screaming: ‘The f*****g bastards have taken her’. Finally, at around 4am, we said: ‘Is it OK if we go to bed?’ We directed this comment towards a man in a white shirt and jeans, who seemed to be authoritative.”

At the couple’s home here, two Yard officers questioned them separately for three hours and got them to sign lengthy statements. They further interviewed them this year to double check their information.

The couple are key because at precisely 9.15pm on May 3, Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, said she left the tapas bar and walked past Gerry, who was talking to holidaymaker Jez Wilkins outside apartment 5a.

Neither Gerry nor Kate said they saw Jane. She reported that she had seen a man carrying a child, believed to be Madeleine, walking across the top of the road.

At the time she had not realised the significance. Officers asked the couple if they saw Jane, Gerry or Jez but they insist they did not.

The Sunday Express has visited the couple’s holiday apartment, which looks over the tapas bar. From its balcony you can see directly into the garden of apartment 5a.

The woman said: “We have one of the best views of the whole block. We are sure of the timings. If we had seen anyone we would have remembered.

“We will continue to answer the Yard’s questions. We have given our fingerprints and DNA. We were happy to assist. They should be left to get on with their inquiries.”

It seems mystery "soothing couple" is indeed a mystery. Who we thought they could be, it turns out, they aren’t. A mystery "soothing couple", that is.

The ones who we thought they were turned out to be just another 2 people who saw mystery "soothing couple" go into 5A: “The tip-off was given by two key witnesses who were reinterviewed as part of the Yard’s two-year, £4.5million investigation.”

So, no question about it. Mrs Fenn and this couple saw "soothing couple".

“Soothing couple” exists. If you believe this couple and Mrs Fenn,

Taking into account the visibility of apartment 5A’s front door, "soothing couple" could have only be seen entering apartment via sliding doors.

So, no question about the fact that Maddie must have screamed her lungs off, poor girl, making “soothing couple" go around the building just to… "soothe" her.

Not very good at soothing children, are they? This if one is to believe in Mrs Fenn’s words, that is.

So many people who were supposed to hear Maddie cry that night but didn't while so many others did.

Interesting thing we have found on Facebook:https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=298958880241023&story_fbid=355885691215008

Aletheia's footstepsCIRCLE OF FRIENDS?

ADAPTED from some information researched by 'Badger', member of the The Maddie Case Files Forum, a while ago. Please not that some of the information maybe no longer current or has changed.

GERRY McCANN plays golf at ROTHLEY PARK GOLF COURSE, where the Manager is a DANNY SPILLANE. Danny worked in Portugal and knows a chain of people known to each other, who have some connection to the McCann’s. This may be of NO significance but the McCann’s were supposed to have NO CONTACTS in Portugal.

DANNY SPILLANE Turning professional at 17, Danny Spillane moved from Lingdale to ROTHLEY PARK, where under the then Club Pro Peter Dolan he completed his training becoming one of the countries youngest qualified Professionals at 20 years old. Several Pro/Am successes and a County Assistants championship were won during this time.

From ROTHLEY to PORTUGAL, where a role of teaching professional at the Parque da Floresta resort was Danny’s next port of call. This role progressed to him becoming the Director of Golf overseeing the resorts £1 million turnover at the age of 24. Whilst in Portugal, Danny helped to run the Henry Cooper Charity Golf Classic and controlled a £1.5 million renovation to the course.

Danny joined ROTHLEY PARK GOLF COURSE as the Head Professional in the Spring of 2002, changing roles to Club Manager in 2009. Danny helped raise over £3,000 for the McCann’s FIND MADELEINE FUND as part of the Rothley Park Golf Club’s Centenary celebrations, completing 101 holes of golf in a day.

http://www.rothleypark.co.uk/

DANNY SPILLANE’s wife, SAMANTHA, is Director of S J EVENTS and hosted an event for a McCann campaign.

KATE & GERRY McCANN – www.findmadeleine.com “It was a joy to have SJ Events helping us with our event. The team were incredibly thorough, highly organised, calm and great fun to work with. What could have been a very stressful occasion was turned into an enjoyable and highly successful one. Each member of the team went above and beyond what would be expected and looked after us all so well. We are incredibly grateful to Sam and all at SJ Events and would not hesitate to recommend them to anybody wanting to hold an event for whatever cause. Truly brilliant!”

A snippet from a [removed] SUNDAY EXPRESS article mentioning GERRY playing golf at ROTHLEY

"At least once a week, usually on a Monday, Gerry plays golf at ROTHLEY PARK GOLF CLUB and then pops in for a pint at the Woodman’s Stroke pub in the village. He also takes the twins to the park. Occasionally on Sundays the whole family goes off to visit friends David and Fiona Payne eight miles away in Leicester. However, apart from their weekly walk to church, it has become very rare to see Gerry and his wife out together – not that anyone should read anything into that. Kate insists: "We are stronger than ever."

FRANK ARTHUR SHARPE (also from Leicester) has DANNY SPILLANE as a friend on his Facebook page.

FRANK SHARPE is Managing Director of GARDEUR DIRECT, Rua Direita, PRAIA DE LUZHere is an entry into a race run by the McCANNs (not published): Gardeur Praia da Luz £50.00 (+£14.10 giftaid) 25/3/11

FRANK signed the McCANN iPETITION as did LINDA SHARPE his wife. They have three children one of whom is a journalist for ALGARVE RESIDENT and who wrote some articles on Madeleine McCann, including one on REV.HAYNES HUBBARD.

Other friends on Facebook include ADAM BUNNEY, BOB BEASON and DEAN RICHARDS

FRANK SHARPE has LEICESTER TIGERS as his favourite team on his FB page, who likely play SALE SHARKS which BRIAN KENNEDY (double glazing) owns.

BOB BEASON also has Leicester Tigers on his FB page. He played for Tigers and was also a Director.

DEAN RICHARDS was named in the 5 day break Six Nations Golf a couple of years ago and was a director of Leicester Tigers. Known as Deano he was an ex police officer and rugby player who played for Leicester Tigers.

Sponsors for LEICESTER TIGERS include SPIRE LEICESTER HOSPITSL “Spire Leicester Hospital provides excellent private healthcare to patients from across the East Midlands and beyond.”

http://www.leicestertigers.com/

ADAM BUNNEYHe appears on both Bob Beason and Frank Sharpes Facebook page as friends, he and his wife are a singing duo and in the ALGARVE. On searching their web page there is a comment from JOHN GERAGHTY:

“I just want to congratulate you for providing fantastic entertainment at BOAVISTA golf club annual prize giving. As Captain it is important that the members feel that they have enjoyed themselves and you both made the whole event very special. Keep your diary open for we shall be calling again. Have a great Christmas and a working New Year”

JOHN GERAGHTY John Geraghty A 68-year-old businessman from Leicestershire who now lives on the outskirts of PRAIA DA LUZ. Offered to store the McCanns' hire car so that they could commission independent forensic tests.

Yes and isn't Frank Sharpe accountant for Vigia Group whose flagship resort, Parque da Floresta was named Best Four Star Development in Portugal? https://portugalresident.com/developers-prosper-at-the-international-property-awards -And isn't Andy Burridge, Vigia’s Sales and Marketing Director the one whose wife found a bag of clothes on the way to Faro airport which supposedly contained items from Madeleine ? One big happy family

The journalist who wrote he article about the Faro bag knows who the source is. Journalists will protect sources, but whoever wrote it should now be considering why the source came forward with such a detailed account of the bag's contents.

Rachael was in the apartment, sick on Wednesday night. She says conversations could be heard in 5a so crying loudly certainly would be.She doesn't say anything about hearing Maddie crying nor speaks of soothing couple.This contradicts Fenn and the couple that told Fenn they went in apartment.

Breaking news and on the MET web site : Grange had 500 responses to a March appeal for info after the news of sexual assaults in the Algarve on Brit white children [ Sky news said all 500 from UK although appeal went out in Germany and Netherlands]. They have some new reports of assaults, 5 plus one " near miss". Sky say SY focus is on the assault on a 10 yr old in PdLin 2005. Reported to holiday rep but not to police [ very strange..] It is hoped that Grange detectives will be in Portugal very soon to work with their Portuguese counterparts.

Following an appeal in March, officers from Operation Grange investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have had a positive response to the appeal which has led to a number of new lines of enquiry.

Detectives overseeing the investigation specifically appealed for further information leading to the identification of a suspect who may have been responsible for a potentially linked series of twelve offences on the Western Algarve region between 2004 and 2010

As a direct result of a media appeal made on 19 March the investigation team subsequently received over 500 calls. Information from those calls has led to the identification of six new cases involving children. These six are in addition to the twelve that had previously been brought to their attention.

These new cases are similar to a number of the originally identified twelve offences whereby a male intruder has gained access to holiday villas occupied by UK families in the Western Algarve.

Of the six new cases, all but one had been reported to the Portuguese police at the time of the offence. Five involve sexual assaults on children and one was a ‘near miss’. Of particular interest to the team is that one of the new sexual assaults took place in Praia da Luz in 2005.

Sufficient characteristics between the cases lead them to now believe that 18 matters in total concerning children may be potentially linked.

Three incidents that took place in Praia de Luz - between 2005 and 2010

Five incidents that took place in Carvoeiro between 2004 and 2006

Nine incidents that took place in the Praia de Gale, Vale de Parra, Sao Rafeal (Albuferia district) between 2004 and 2008

One incident that took place in Vilamoura in 2005, a new offence which has come to light since the March appeal.

Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, the senior investigating officer said: “I’m encouraged by the new information that has come to light as a direct result of the appeal in March. There has been a huge public desire to assist us with our investigation and I would like to thank those who have provided us with new information.”

Anyone with any information is asked to call the Operation Grange incident room on 0207 321 9251. Alternatively if you do not want to speak to us directly you can contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

The Metropolitan Police Service continues to offer a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person(s) responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007.

NOTES TO EDITORS:

Following today's press conference the following material can be embedded on to your website.

A sound clip from DCI Andy Redwood detailing the latest update following the Madeleine McCann appeal in March 2014.

I am totally sickened by this latest round of cr*p from the msm and sy. I actually cannot read it anymore. And, tragically, I am finding that the pictures of poor Madeleine herself are affecting me adversely. The photographs of the child have become synonymous with the actions of the parents and all the bullsh*t published. How much longer can this be allowed to continue??

POLICE NOW READY TO MAKE ARRESTS IN THE ALGARVE IN MISSING MADELEINE MCCANN CASEDETECTIVES hunting the ¬kidnapper of Madeleine McCann are poised to make arrests.

By: John TwomeyPublished: Thu, April 24, 2014

The breakthrough comes after they identified new ¬incidents where British girls were targeted by a lone ¬paedophile in Portugal.

nine cases in the Algarve girls were sexually assaulted, it has been revealed. Now an elite unit of Scotland Yard officers is ready to fly out to support wide-ranging operations by the Portuguese police.

Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry, who are convinced their little girl will be found alive, welcomed the news yesterday.

Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “Whatever needs to be done on the ground in Portugal needs to be done as effectively and swiftly as ¬possible.”

Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner ¬Martin Hewitt confirmed the authorities in Lisbon have responded positively to a series of “international letters of request” from the Yard.

He said: “In the relatively near future, we will start to see activity on behalf of the Portuguese with us involved as potential suspects in connection with 18 incidents.

They need to be traced, interviewed and eliminated so inquiries can focus on the most likely offenders.It is understood Portuguese police have DNA from at least one incident.

The speeding up of the investigation comes less than two weeks before the seventh anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance from the McCann ¬holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007 when she was three.

A source close to Kate and Gerry McCann, both 45 from Rothley, Leics, said Met officers hoped to be “on the ground in Portugal” for the first time since the squad was formed “within a fortnight”.

He said: “It appears the Yard have X, Y and Z they want to interview out there but they won’t have the power to do it themselves.

“Any arrests and formal interviews will be conducted by the Portuguese police with Met officers sitting in.”

The Yard squad first identified a prolific paedophile as a potential ¬suspect last month after a major appeal through newspapers and BBC’s Crimewatch.

At the time, 12 incidents on the Algarve were connected to him, two in Praia da Luz.

The new cases have been added since the appeal, which prompted more than 500 calls and emails.

In particular police heard from a 19-year-old who was sexually assaulted by a lone intruder at a holiday home in the “heart of Praia da Luz” in 2005 when she was 10. It is thought she may have only recently told anyone about her ordeal.

Yard detectives are focusing on 12 of the incidents – nine sex assaults and three “near misses”. The other six incidents happened further away or years after Madeleine was snatched.

All the victims were white, British, aged between six and 12 and were attacked between 2004 and 2006. The paedophile – described as smelly and pot-bellied – crept into their ¬bedrooms without forcing entry.

He spoke ¬English with a foreign accent, was tanned, with short, dark, unkempt hair, and reeked of tobacco, stale aftershave or alcohol.

During two incidents, he wore a ¬burgundy long-sleeved top. One ¬witness said it had a white circle on the back. Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, head of Operation Grange, said several features of the description, the type of offences and the way they were committed point to a lone offender.

Scotland Yard is offering a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person or persons responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann.

If you have information call the Operation Grange incident room on 020 7321 9251. Or contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

News HeadlinesMore suspicious news headlines have been spotted in the UK and Portugal.They were previously spotted in October, but have recently been reported again as new suspects.New arrests to follow old arrests.SY hope to find more headlines before the month is out.A spokesman said "These new headlines have given us the best leads so far. We are currently working on promising new headlines."

Smithman has been abducted!This promising lead from Crimewatch hasn't been seen since.Crechedad is now back and is to be questioned about whether he saw Smithman. Or whether he was Smithman.More Ripping Yarns ahead.

12 houses unlocked12 British white kids12 to 6 years of age9 of which were implemented and3 sexual assaults were almost, but did not actually happen18 incidents in total registered12 offences on the Western Algarve region Between 2004 and 2010 = 6 years

Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, the senior investigating officer said: "I'm encouraged by the new information that has come to light as a direct result of the appeal in March. There has been a huge public desire to assist us with our investigation and I would like to thank those who have provided us with new information." Anyone with any information is asked to call the Operation Grange incident room on 0207 321 9251. Alternatively if you do not want to speak to us directly you can contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

The Metropolitan Police Service continues to offer a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person(s) responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007.

It is just sickening. Is this a very blatant cover up or whitewash? Or are SY playing a game? Either way, it is disheartening to be a UK citizen right now.

HelenMeG,A lot of us here feel ashamed of our country or its establishment.I'm not here for Maddie as such, more for what her death has revealed to me about what's going on.Let her death not have been completely in vain.

Thank you for that message Textusa. I'm Anon yest at 1.47.. Thank you too Helenmeg for your reply and understanding. I am annoyed with myself that I do actually feel a sense of revulsion towards certain much published photographs. Of a poor poor child for goodness sake!! However, did you see the one of her Kateness posted on twitter yesterday by Teddy (aka Himself) ?? I really would like to know when that one was taken!

Sky News - 5 white british children assaulted in Algarve on top of the 12 already reported. The same "modus operandi" as for Maddie, says Redwood. Really? Hard to believe.Something really serious and shameful happen to Maddie that needs to be covered by the british authorities. Something so serious that lead SY to present to the world a very bad picture about the british parents and british tourists who travel abroad- parents are irresponsible and leave their children at the risk of being easy targets for paedos and when attacked did not report it to the police to get the perpetrators caught and jailed. What a good parenting. And what about the mens, the british tourists who travel abroad to give free time to their instincts and attack children of the same nationality, at night and inside their rooms? Too much to believe. What normally happen when a story is exagerated? Time proves, is a lie, a fabrication to cover up the real story.Did Redwood knows that paedophilia is a disturbance very close to a disease and who suffers of it could not control the instincts and sellect the moment or the country to act? Where have been this paedos before arriving to Algarve? In Uk? Why they did not attack in other countries, including UK? Only in Portugal. Well, Redwood want us to believe they were singular Paedos, which on Maddie case not only selected the country and the region but selected also a small town in a low season, when children were the most improbable subject to find. Amazing that none attack was reported in the hot season ( July, Aug, Sep). Why? Affraid to have many other tourists contradicting this rubbish strategy? Everything is being meticulously calculated to be played. But as usual, they fail on the details. Did Redwood knows that the OC has a School nearby, which could be a easy target for Paedos in low season, when the schools are open? Why omitting that fact? Why a Paedo should bother himself and take too much risks by controlling houses, entering them, if a school is available with many children? And how the Paedo enter 17 houses without damaging anything on the properties? They were all unlocked? Did he got the keys of all of them? See Redwood, too much questions to which you need a good excuse.To be noticed as well that Sky news brought back Tannerman/ creche dad. The Smiths man is a subject to avoid. Creche dad, you need very good alibis for the months the days the assaults were reported. No worries.... I strongly believe, you too is a fabrication of Redwood to credibilize the kidnap of Maddie by a stranger.

Another topic that call my attention- just google " anglican priests + UK+ Praia da Luz + Mccann's". You arrive to a link from Pamalan where all the connections are there to be seen- the anglican priests, the Portugal Resident, who seems to be the paper that covers all the priest activities and some interesting old articles. One in the US media, where a lady claims to have his son Louie playing football with Maddie near the pool on the afternoon of May 2. Was she not reported to be in the creche that afternoon? If the football epysode happen, the girl must be tired at night and have a good sleep, then how she cried to bothered mrs Fenn and the other couple? Who is lying? Probably all, since on that case there was no innocent and honest witnesses. And what about the Hubbards, who seems to know well the Algarve and the British comunnity but pretended to be new on the statements given to the police? Susan said on her statement to PJ that she organized in the church( not in PDL) an event for missing children On 25 of May and invited Kate. I believe, if happen will deserve an article on the Portugal resident. Nothing was reported. There was a church activity involving several anglican priests on 19. On 25, nothing was reported and Kate also failed to report a so kindly event from her best friend in Algarve.

At first I believed the Smith sighting for what it was and that it was genuine. But now I have my doubts, considering the duplicity and lies within this case for example Kate’s book attempting to rewrite facts and their relentless pursuit of Sr Amaral, their on-line store and scripted interviews and the lengths those involved will go to mislead and misinform the public I feel uneasy with their sighting. Firstly the McCann’s made an appeal to Irish tourists which at the time seemed odd, why Irish? And nothing seems to have come from this sighting, no further evidence just more controversy it’s very similar to the Gaspers statements. IMO these ‘events’ are published to confuse and mislead. At the beginning the McCann’s did not have the professional backing they have today and consequently many amateurish mistakes were made by them, for example his daily blog and their frequent jogging, Kate carrying cuddle cat everywhere but once highly paid and aware individuals became involved these ‘mistakes’ were quickly corrected. Today the only paper that bothers to carry ‘Maddie’ news is the Express; this paper was sued by the McCann’s for thousands. This case clearly has all the ingredients of a cover-up far too many coincidences and too much publicity for one child. The fact that they are still able (7 years later) to have front page headlines clearly indicates influential people are involved, I believe in the old adage ‘give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves’. The McCann’s are involved in the cover-up because innocent parents do not act in the way the McCann’s have acted. Eventually they will be found guilty, and they will fact justice for their crimes and the truth will be revealed, but in the meantime I would like to thank Textusa et al for all your work, it is read by many and unlike the fawning on-line news articles concerning the McCann’s that refused to allow comments, we can comment here, we are aware of the lies presented to us by team McCann and that is what bothers the McCann’s they cannot silence the internet.

Star Amazing new clue/ red herring/ Found by ex- police constable, long time departed from the police force.No logo relating to beer described in the original story, just a big 0, but don't let that stop anyone confabulating

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.

Total Pageviews

MESSAGE to NEWCOMERS

This blog believes that concerning the MADDIE McCANN case the following happened:

- Maddie McCanndied in the early evening of May 3rd, 2007, in the Apartment 5A. We believe the death to have been accidental.

- At the time of Maddie's death the Praia da Luz's Ocean Club was hosting a large swinging holiday in which the McCanns and friends were part of among many others.

- After Maddie's death a cover-up of unseen proportions and scope took place not to hide Maddie's death but with the main purpose of hiding the presence of swinging. To achieve that, Maddie's death had to be hidden.

- We don't believe there was any sort of negligence involved in the Maddie affair. We don't believe that T9 dined at Tapas Bar from Sunday to Wednesday. We think that on those nights they left their children with professional nannies - as did other guests - to go dine downtown PdL. On Thursday night they did use Tapas but that was simply part of what was to be "negligence"that was required to allow Maddie to be "abducted."

PJ Files

Anonymity

A MAJOR MINORITY

TRUTH is Self-Sustained

Think for yourself

Luz - THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED

PdL - What a place. Why does anyone holiday there?It's populated by black heroin addicts, people who rob apartments, gypsies who steal scrap and wood, scruffy moustachioed lurers of children, bogus charity collectors, suspicious street musicians, men lurking near phone booths, glasses man lurking in stairwells, blond men suspiciously lurking outside apartments, soothing couples entering apartments without permission, mysterious gangs of cleaners, men taking photographs of children on beaches... And to top it all, you have to queue for a table booking.Anonymous 11Nov 2013 12:22:00

Maybe because you can always enjoy an ice-cream in the rain?And a dip in an icy pool on arrival always attracts a crowd.Textusa 11Nov 2013 12:28:00

I like the Tapas fragile chairs and tables. They wobble nicely when cutting thick grilled steaks spilling the drinks all about! It's fun for the whole family!Anonymous 11Nov 2013 13:08:00

And how about the number of men seen carrying little blond girls in the street in the middle of the night?Anonymous 11Nov 2013 14:04:00

PdL - where families take it in turn to vomit each night, dog packs pursue and bite joggers, guests fall off catamarans, damage tendons playing tennis, have shaving accidents and stagger around apartments bleeding, domestic appliances need repair, shutters jam, baby monitors won't function at restaurants, travel cots can't be assembled.. sounds like THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED.Anonymous 12 Nov 2013 12:37:00

Child Catcher

Algarve - THE REGION OF THE DAMNED

“Algarve – Where Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’s Child Catcher found it ideal to roam the streets with his GYPSY-wagon:“There are children here somewhere. I can smell them. Come along, kiddie-winkies!”Algarve, the REGION OF THE DAMNED.”

Please Reconstruct I:

PJ's Declaration for Reopening Process:

"Madeleine McCann

As is the case with any situation in which a child goes missing, notwithstanding formal dismissal of the inquiry into her disappearance, and just as has always been publicly stated, the Polícia Judiciária never stopped paying close attention to any and all information that might possibly shed light on the whereabouts of the minor Madeleine McCann, the circumstances surrounding her disappearance and the identity of the perpetrator(s).

It was with this goal in mind that in March 2011 the National Director of the Polícia Judiciária entrusted a team of investigators from the North Directorate with the mission of reassessing, as a whole, the vast amount of information gathered during the inquiry, aimed at identifying data for which a more in-depth investigation might be useful and possible.

The reassessment which took place over the last two years and a half suggested new evidence to have surfaced, which, requiring the investigation to proceed, meets the requirements set out by section 279(1) of the Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure for reopening of the inquiry.

Accordingly, a request for reopening was made to the Public Prosecutor for the jurisdiction of Portimao, and approval granted by the latter. "

The Anne Guedes Transcriptions

Permanent Suggested Reading

Quote

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

Revelations

"For the righteous, a revelation is a joyous event, the realization of a divine truth but for the wicked, revelations can be far more terrifying, when dark secrets are exposed and sinners are punished for their trespasses." Quote from the TV Series "Revenge" (T2 - Ep9)

Truth

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.Arthur Schopenhauer

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.Winston Churchill

The Revolution

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.George Orwell

The Revolution Goes Viral

"Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure, you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation"The Guardian (04Jan12)

We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts Winston Churchill

PRECIOUS, SO TRUE, WORDS

“One coincidence, two coincidences – maybe they’re still coincidences. Any more than that and it stops being coincidence.”

Kate McCann

(in MADELEINE, by Kate McCann, published in 2011 by Bantam Press, pg. 328)

Imagine...

"This says it all, Ms Loach hit the nail on the head!

"Ms Loach replied: “Imagine the public believing that you covered up your child’s death and then sought to make money out of it. They feel shame, humiliation and anguish."

Yes, that's exactly what we, the public, believe, because that's exactly what they did! And, their "shame, humiliation and anguish" are because they know we know!"

Comment posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Sep 16, 2013, 8:36:00 AM on "McCann vs Amaral Libel Trial" post referring to Mockumentary maker Emma Loach's testimony on the 1st day of said trial as one of McCann's defense witness.

Legal Disclaimer

This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and of opinions, between WHITE HATS, so is not responsible for the use, misuse or any form of interpretation (mainly misinterpretation) of its content, as although it uses a public medium, as is the internet, it's of PRIVATE nature, very much like any other conversation that takes place in a restaurant, pub or any other public location, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised.

Sound Explanation for Viciousness

Compliments from the Maggots' Lair:

- “…all the others pale into insignificance when compared to textusa.”

- “I think she should be on the streets and off the internet"

Chinagirl):

- “Disgusting piece of slime.”

(Raptor):

- “Yikes ! That's disgusting.”

(preciousramotswe):

- “You are right. It's a shambolic mess of vitriol and obtuseness. But then they always are. The one that some claimed finally 'proved' who was carrying who during the Smith sighting is a masterpiece of deliberately confused arguments in which labrynthine plots are used to cover how empty the central thesis is”

Out of the Blue (or... Black?)

Hey textusa How are you? well I hope,just thought I would tell you that there are videos about you on youtube, claiming you are an internet predator who stole her daughters identity and prowls the forums for young boys, they say you are welsh!! I think its a case of mistaken identity because are you not portuguese and male? Anyway great blog. keep it up.(Anon., Nov 13th, 05:43)

Conversation from the "Lightless Zone"

sabot:

“Wot Round Table?”

bonnybraes1:

“He/she/it invented a barking mad 'theory' about no-one actually having eaten in the Tapas, because he/she/it couldn't grasp the table arrangements.”

So, because textusa doesn't understand stuff like that, all the Tapas group, the staff, everyone, were lying.

OMG - you don't suppose textusa is actually Gonc, do you?”

sansouci:“Could be Bonny.

The 'theories' about the table and the watersports are really so far beyond bizarre, that I get the feeling that 'textusa' could actually be 'pisstaka'.”

BLACK BUT TRUE WORDS

“Because no-one is more vicious in their search for payback that those who realise they have allowed themselves to be taken for a fool” (A "boomerang" comment left by an Anonymous (Insane?) at Sep 22, 2012 2:06:00 PM)

Insane's IMPORTANT Comments

“…How would any of you idiots like it if your name came into the public domain because you were witness to a crime, and some mad bitch set up a site in which she called you a liar, and claimed you were actually involved in the crime you witnessed? Just ponder on that for a moment”

Aug 28, 2011 9:27:00 AM

“…Where is your sense of shame or decency in accusing innocent witnesses of being involved in covering up the death of a child?

I see no shame or decency on here - just an utter indifference to the rights or feelings of others.

I notice no-one had the balls to answer my question about how you would feel if this was done to you - if you were a witness to a crime and some deranged cow on the internet accused you of being involved. You are all a complete disgrace.”

Aug 28, 2011 1:09:00 PM

FOOT IN THE MOUTH DISEASE

Insane (Nov 14, 2012 11:37:00 PM):

Oh look here - amazing what one can find out by means of a couple of emails to Mark Warner.

You are toast, lady. Finished.

I am going to enjoy this more than is actually decent.

Textusa (Nov 15, 2012 8:50:00 AM):

Well it seems that you're quite privy with the Ocean Club aren't you?

Them giving YOU the information about their own mails?

And you threatening us based on information that YOU apparently got from the Ocean Club.

That's really interesting, isn't it?

Insane (Nov 15, 2012 10:47:00 PM):

One thing I really like about Mark Warner is how helpful their staff are. Really go the extra mile for someone needing information. IYKWIM

:)

Textusa (Nov 16, 2012 11:17:00 AM):

Thank you for confirming that Mark Warner Staff are supplying YOU with information pertaining the Maddie Affair.

Insane's Moment of Rare Beauty

“It would be more suspicious if every account tallied. Police expect to find contradictions, don't tell me you did not know this?” (Nov 22, 2012 3:38:00 PM), when providing an opinion on contradictions from various statements in the PJ Files.

“I don't give a rat's arse about the statements which tally too closely - of course some of them tally too closely, there is an in depth analysis of them on my blog, the one you are not invited to.” (Nov 22, 2012 4:08:00 PM), when, exactly 30 minutes later, provides an opposite opinion, in this case about the fact that some of Tapas' Staff's statements tally too closely.

Insane the Entrepeneur?

"I'd love to stay, but I have a report to write, and it won't do itself, will it?" (Nov 29, 2012 8:14:00 PM)Insane the Disruptor, a new profession shown inNew Career Opportunities

Insane's Proposal for a New Legal Disclaimer

Textusa's new disclaimer. Please ignore all previous versions

''This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and opinions between people who have sniffed WAY too many solvents, and the imaginary people who live at the bottom of their garden, and so is not responsible for the enormous fines, possible imprisonment, or lifelong incarceration in a mental hospital which may result from it's content, as although it is on the interclickyweb, it is of a private nature, accompanied only by the voices in their heads, very much like any other conversation which takes place in a psychiatric ward between people rocking backwards and forwards in their seat and eating the wallcoverings, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised in the half hour per day of free association which the inmates are allowed.''Comment NOT published but submitted on Aug 22, 2011 10:17:00 PM

Kate's Round Table

INSANE'S BLOG

We waited so long for the link...

A possible explanation for the wait: "As I have made perfectly clear, you and your sort will never have access to my blog. We are particular about who we invite, and would not include screaming harpies and riff-faff like yourself."unpublished comment from Insane at Nov 23, 2012 10:55:00 AM

Then, a glimmer of hope?“Publishing elsewhere the posts Textusa refuses to publish is also appropriate - and also gives you fools a chance to read what she withholds from you, knowing that you would desert her if you were aware of how much trouble she leads you into.” (Nov 29, 2012 12:40:00 PM)

No, it wasn’t to be so… :“For the last time, you will never be provided with a link for my blog - you are not welcome there and will never be given access”(Nov 29, 2012 1:38:00 PM)